This Digest of case laws is prepared by KSA Legal and AIFTP from judgements reported in BCAJ, CTR, DTR, ITD, ITR, ITR (Trib), Chamber's Journal, SOT, Taxman, TTJ, BCAJ, ACAJ, www.itatonline.org and other journals
Click here to download the pdf versions of the Digest of case laws

S. 143(3) : Assessment-Violation of natural justice-High-pitched assessment-Denial of opportunity for personal hearing-Assessment not valid. [S. 143(3A), 143(3B), Art. 226]

Dastan Residency v. NEAC (2022) 446 ITR 571 / 210 DTR 271 /325 CTR 468/ 138 taxmann.com 375 (Guj.)(HC)

S. 143(3): Assessment-Estimation of gross profit-Question of fact-Appeal is not maintainable. [S. 260A]

Ankit Ispat Pvt. Ltd. v. ACIT (OSD) (2022) 446 ITR 157 / 288 Taxman 102 (Mad.)(HC)

S. 143(3) : Assessment-Bogus purchases-No rule that entire purchases should be added-Sales accepted-Disallowance of 12.5 Per Cent. of purchases held to be proper. [S. 37(1)]

PCIT v. Batliboi Environmental Engineering Ltd. (2022) 446 ITR 238 (Bom.)(HC)

S. 139 : Return of income-Revised return-Export-oriented undertaking-Declaration to be furnished to Assessing Officer in writing and before due date for filing return-Filing original return on due date with Auditor’s report claiming exemption and not carrying forward any loss-Claim of exemption withdrawn in revised return filed after due date and loss claimed to be carried forward-Held to be not permissible. [S. 10B(5), 10B(8), 72, 80, 139(1), 139(3), 139(5)]

PCIT v. Wipro Ltd. (2022) 446 ITR 1 / 216 DTR 1 / 327 CTR 381 140 taxmann.com 223 (SC) Editorial : Decision of the Karnataka High Court in PCIT v. Wipro Ltd [2021] 17 ITR-OL 253 (Karn) reversed.Editorial: Application for listing Review Petition in open Court was rejected , Wipro Ltd v.PCIT( 2022) 289 Taxman 621 ( SC)

S. 132B : Application of seized or requisitioned assets-Cash seized by police-Search and seizure-Cash seized from individual-Application by the firm to release the cash seized from its employee-No evidence-Rejection of application is held to be justified. [S. 132, 132(4),132A ,153A, Art. 226]

Rameshkumar Shankarlal and Co. v. Dy.CIT (2022) 446 ITR 343 / (2023) 333 CTR 475/ 226 DTR 294 (Guj.)(HC)

S. 132 : Search and seizure-Warrant of authorisation-Reason to believe-Accommodation entry-Warrant of authorisation to investigate trail of money paid-Detailed reasons recorded in satisfaction note-Bona fide opinion that assessee would not respond to summons in West Bengal-Warrant of authorisation valid. [Art. 226]

PDIT (Inv) v. Laljibhai Kanjibhai Mandalia (2022) 446 ITR 18 / 215 DTR 417 / 327 CTR 353 / 288 Taxman 361 (SC) Editorial : Laljibhai Kanjibhai Mandalia v. PDIT (Inv.) (2019) 416 ITR 365 (Guj.)(HC) order of High Court set aside.

S. 119 : Central Board of Direct Taxes-Condonation of delay-Pending application-Circular dated 9-6-2015 (2015) 374 ITR 25 (St) prescribing limitation period of six years-Cannot have retrospective effect-Order Rejecting application on basis of circular set aside-Matter Remanded to Board. [S. 54EC, 119(2)(b), 154, 264, Art. 226]

R. Ramakrishnan v. CBDT (2022) 446 ITR 308/ 219 DTR 143 / 329 CTR 533 (Karn.)(HC)

S. 92CA : Reference to Transfer Pricing Officer-Arm’s Length price-Limitation-Reference and approval-Question of limitation is legal plea and can be raised at any stage-Existence of alternate remedy not bar-Writ is maintainable Participation of assessee in proceedings not a bar to challenging jurisdiction-The reference to the Transfer Pricing Officer had been made after the permissible period, the timeline had been missed by the Department at every stage. Therefore, as a sequitur, all further proceedings, in furtherance thereof were also bad in law-Decision of single judge set aside. [S. 144C, 153(1) Art. 226]

Virtusa Consulting Services Pvt. Ltd. v. DRP (No. 2) (2022) 446 ITR 454 (Mad.)(HC) Editorial : Order of single judge set aside, Virtusa Consulting Services Pvt. Ltd. v. DRP (No. 1) (2022) 446 ITR 439/ 212 DTR 292 / 326 CTR 59 (Mad.)(HC)

S. 80HHC : Export business-Turnover-Burden is on assessee to prove that royalty received from subsidiary company related to Export business-Royalty not to be included in turnover for computation deduction. [S. 80HHC(4)]

Fenner (India) Limited v. ACIT (2022) 446 ITR 241 (Mad.)(HC)

S. 68 : Cash credits-Sale consideration-Burden not discharged-Addition is justified. [Indian Evidence Act, 1872, S. 106]

Joseph Thannikottu Korah v. PCIT (2022) 446 ITR 723 / 213 DTR 185 / 326 CTR 621 (Ker.)(HC)